Lubbock's government a balancing act

Fed up with what he deemed a lousy city government, a man closed his letter with a passionate suggestion to fix things at City Hall: "We need to hire a city manager!"

The letter, of course, was inaccurate. Lubbock has a city manager, and has had one for the past 90 years. The city manager, hired by the council, runs the day-to-day operations of the city while the elected council sets the overarching policy - the manager-council form of government.

Nonetheless, the man's letter raises some interesting points, especially as we approach a city election where Lubbock will decide its mayor for the next two years.

 If the letter writer didn't know the city has a professional manager, who did he think was running the city?

 What's the right balance between councils and managers?

 And is this still the best form of government for Lubbock?

None of the candidates running for office in May's election are advocating for a switch in city government. All say they believe this is the correct form of government for Lubbock.

Yet there are degrees. Candidate Armando Gonzales has said the city could get by with fewer assistant city managers if council members did more micromanaging. Other candidates and current council members believe there is a time when the council must take on a bigger role in times of trouble, as the council had recently with Lubbock Power & Light.

Hiring a city manager to run things is a common practice for cities across the United States, especially in those Lubbock's size and smaller. Bigger cities, such as Houston, have strong-mayor systems, where the elected mayor acts as a manager and formulates the budget, with council oversight.

But smaller cities have for years found it easier to turn operations over to a full-time manager, who reports directly to the city council. The issues they deal with are basically the same, whether in big cities or small towns.

"The city manager is essentially the chief operating officer; the mayor is the chief executive officer," said Ric Walton, the city manager in Post.

Lee Ann Dumbauld has been Lubbock's city manager since 2005. She's paid $225,000 a year to oversee the city and its budget of $315 million. She is one of three city employees reporting directly to the City Council - all others report to the city manager.

No one council member can fire the city manager. It takes four of the seven members to remove her.

Windy Sitton, Lubbock's mayor from 1998-2002, said the relationships between a city manager and the council is a balancing act, one that can only work if council members trust those they have in place.

"That is the issue," she said. "You don't have to micromanage if you have the right people on the bus, so to speak."

Mayors are typically elected citywide. In Lubbock, the mayor is the only spot on the council who every resident gets a chance to vote on; the other six members are elected from districts.

There are other forms of council-manager systems, where several council members are elected citywide and the council chooses who will serve as its head. School boards often select their own board president.

It may be natural for residents and even some city staff to think the mayor has more authority in Lubbock's system than he actually does. Though elected citywide, Lubbock's mayors are just one vote of seven on the council.

Lubbock City Councilwoman Linda DeLeon said the mayor is often approached first on major city issues by staff, but she would rather see things come to all council members first.

"He's got a different title then the rest of us, but I don't think the mayor should have that much more authority over the other six," she said. "He's seen as the one to bring consensus to the council and some leadership, to try to work on both sides, so if there is a split we can come to a consensus."

Councils have no authority until they meet, meaning the day-to-day business must be left to staff.

There are times, however, when councils exert more will, as the Lubbock City Council did when LP&L neared insolvency in 2003.

That leadership is a campaign theme of mayoral candidate Tom Martin, who was a member of the council that pushed for a city charter change and gave LP&L a separate governing board.

The council believed LP&L was a victim of poor city management. The utility today has rebounded and is working toward a reserve fund of $50 million.

"The council realized that the way things had been managed that the financial shape of Lubbock Power & Light threatened the entire financial picture of the city," Martin said.

"That was one of those issues, almost similar to the Lubbock tornado, where the council, being representatives of the people, had to be immediately involved."

But councils aren't always expected to have such a strong management role, said City Councilman Todd Klein. Elected in 2006, Klein was the last council member to go before voters as a candidate.

City governments are "living, breathing organizations," ones that can grow in authority and then recess as situations allow, he said.

He doesn't think residents want the council to micromanage the government, he said.

"I think (residents) expect leadership adequate to the task," Klein said. "The more challenging, the more potentially controversial, the more significant the issue, the more they expect us to enhance what is the existing policy role that we provide."

Lubbock Mayor David Miller is using leadership as a campaign issue to draw distinctions between himself and Martin.

As previous councils tightened their grip, they also lost numerous city staff, saw the departure of four city managers and paid settlements of about $1 million in lawsuits to former and current employees.

Martin, who spent 30 years working in municipal government, was part of the council that promoted Dumbauld to city manager and said he looks forward to working with her again.

But Miller said the leadership of Martin and those councils was too domineering. The city has had less turnover among its senior staff since Miller has been mayor.

"One style is magnetic and attractive and encourages people," Miller said. "The other system demoralizes them, defeats them and causes people to leave."